ON POLITICS

ON POLITICS; Troopers Are Off the Hook, But the State Is Still Mired

By David Kocieniewski

Published: January 20, 2002

TRENTON—
In retrospect, it was probably a bit of a stretch for anyone to expect John Hogan and James Kenna, two state troopers, to help put an end to the state's lingering nightmare over racial profiling.

Yet when they appeared in court last Monday and pleaded guilty to drastically reduced charges stemming from the 1998 shooting on the New Jersey Turnpike, the plan was for them to finally put the issue to rest.

The attorney general's office was willing to accept the troopers' explanation that the shooting was self-defense and that the troopers opened fire on a van full of black and Hispanic men only after the vehicle backed up toward Officer Hogan and knocked him to the ground. In exchange for having the serious charges of aggravated assault and attempted murder dropped, the troopers would have to admit to much lesser crimes: lying about the incident when they were first interviewed by the police and falsifying documents to hide the fact that they routinely singled out drivers based on their skin color.

The troopers' union would succeed in having its officers cleared of the most serious charges. Officers Hogan and Kenna would be fired, but not jailed. The victims have already agreed to a $12.9 million civil settlement with the state. The civil rights community was supposed to be mollified by the fact that at long last, the officers at the center of the 1998 shooting acknowledged that the incident had indeed been racially motivated.

But a funny thing happened on the way to the state's tidy little ending. The troopers were a bit too forthcoming in admitting that after the shooting they spoke with dozens of fellow officers and were urged to cover up the incident by an any number of troopers and supervisors.

The attorney general's office didn't seem particularly determined to track down those accusations. The prosecutor, James J. Gerrow, who occasionally sounded like a defense lawyer during the court proceeding, told the judge that despite the accusations of widespread obstruction of justice -- a charge that led to a president's impeachment not long ago -- he just didn't have the resources to investigate the cover-up.

Most incredible, Judge Charles A. Delehey seemed more concerned about the officers than the three men they wounded or the thousands of drivers who have been the victims of racial profiling during the decade that the state refused to acknowledge the obvious.

''You are victims, not only of your own actions, but of the system that employed you,'' Judge Delehey said to the two officers in chastising the State Police for teaching young troopers that profiling was an acceptable practice and forcing Officer Kenna back into duty less than a month after he was involved in another shooting incident. The judge then fined each man $280 and decided that they were so trustworthy they didn't need to be placed on probation.

Before the officers even left the courthouse, the furor began. The Rev. Reginald T. Jackson, executive director of the Black Ministers Council of New Jersey, was visibly disturbed. By day's end, state legislators, who held aggressive hearings about racial profiling in 2000, were receiving outraged calls from civil rights activists demanding that they launch a new inquiry, complete with public hearings.

Gov. James E. McGreevey, who disappointed many civil rights leaders by failing to mention racial profiling during his inaugural address last Tuesday, was later asked about the matter and pledged to have his new attorney general and State Police superintendent look into the matter.

So while the troopers' union may have won the day by seeing its members pampered, the State Police now face the uncomfortable prospect of a new round of inquiry into profiling -- this time by an administration with very little to lose by conducting a thorough housecleaning.

During the Whitman administration, the attorney general's office spent years denying the existence of profiling, even as there was mounting statistical evidence that black and Hispanic drivers were being stopped and searched in grossly disproportionate numbers. Mrs. Whitman ultimately admitted that there had been profiling and agreed to let a court-appointed monitor oversee the force.

She even installed a new attorney general and a new State Police superintendent, both of whom were committed to ending the practice. But the administration didn't have the stomach to anger the politically powerful troopers' union by clearing out the supervisors who had taught and rewarded profiling for years.

When Mr. Gerrow, who was appointed by the attorney general's office, appeared gunshy about delving into the cover-up, his actions left the state open to charges -- fairly or unfairly -- that the state was afraid an inquiry might embarrass many of the midlevel managers in the attorney general's office.

As a newcomer, Mr. McGreevey will face no such worries about embarrassing his underlings. Despite his puzzling omission of racial profiling during the speech, he has a strong record of speaking out against the practice.

If the governor were to balk however, State Senator William L. Gormley , a Republican from Atlantic County, is waiting in the wings. Mr. Gormley led the Legislature's last investigation into profiling and wouldn't mind running for governor himself one day, so he might be persuaded to take up the issue again in the Senate Judiciary Committee. Who knows? If the Senate were to hold public hearings, they might even call Mr. Hogan and Mr. Kenna to testify, and put the issue to rest once and for all.